-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How can you be honestly a KJVONLYIST?
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
Ignorance or intentional dishonesty are the only ways I see one can be KJVO.
37818
Well-Known Member
Do you think KJVO should simply be ignored?
I think that the KJVO movement is decreasing because of resources avaliable to about anybody today. Each one can read exactly how the KJV became "the" Bible, questionable translation choices, influences of the crown, etc. As ignorance is cured people will move away from the movement (not necessarily the KJV, but the "onlyism" part).
Also, age will take care of much of this issue. The KJV is no longer the top selling translation - and it no longer meets its goal of providing a translation in the English vernacular. It is primarily used by an older generation, and many times due to tradition.
I love the KJV, but I would not use it as my primary study translation. Actually, I can't remember the last time I reached for that translation (I like reading Psalms in the KJV).
There are, but I do not think it is bigger than KJVO.
Those who prefer a translation seem to understand the meaning of a translation and some even how God's Word is preserved by various translations.
The reason I believe this is simply that I know of no NASBO, ESVO, NIVO, or NJJVO movements.
KJVO worship a translation of Scripture which also has real textual issues.
That, IMHO, is a larger problem.
I could be a member of a KJV preferred church, although I would disagree with their preference. I could be a member of a NIV, NASB, ESV preferred church.
I would never consider being a member of a KJVO church.
37818
Well-Known Member
The following PDF will identify to restore correct KJV readings.
https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles...EAE1CF/A-Textual-Key-to-the-New-Testament.pdf
But needs to be checked against Greek text f35 readings. Wilbur Pickering’s New Testament.
or The New EMTV Greek Study Bible 2011 Edition.
The better know Majority Text.
The differences are slight.
https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles...EAE1CF/A-Textual-Key-to-the-New-Testament.pdf
But needs to be checked against Greek text f35 readings. Wilbur Pickering’s New Testament.
or The New EMTV Greek Study Bible 2011 Edition.
The better know Majority Text.
The differences are slight.
Last edited:
And, of course, we have to remember that the source for the KJV was not the best (some was Latin translated to Greek, translated to English).
As far as source text, if I preferred the KJV sources I'd probably favor the NKJV.
I believe the goal of the KJV translators was on point. And the KJV simple does not meet that goal today. Every people should have a translation of God's Word in their vernacular.
That said, the most accurate translation of the Bible is the ability to understand and read different translations. This is the fatal flaw of KJVO.
As far as source text, if I preferred the KJV sources I'd probably favor the NKJV.
I believe the goal of the KJV translators was on point. And the KJV simple does not meet that goal today. Every people should have a translation of God's Word in their vernacular.
That said, the most accurate translation of the Bible is the ability to understand and read different translations. This is the fatal flaw of KJVO.
Should seeking the truth and advocating consistent scriptural truth be dismissed or smeared as supposedly being an "echo chamber"?
The truth remains that the Scriptures do not teach nor command English-speaking believers to read or use only the KJV. A KJV-only theory rests on use of fallacies and on advocating opinions and traditions of men.
The truth remains that the Scriptures do not teach nor command English-speaking believers to read or use only the KJV. A KJV-only theory rests on use of fallacies and on advocating opinions and traditions of men.
37818
Well-Known Member
The Byzantine TR Majority reading is 90.7% of the manuscript evidence. The Orthodox Church text reading is 7.3% of the evidence. The Bibles which omit "but by every word of God," are base on very few manuscripts, a mere 00.4% of manuscript evidence.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
I don't see how being ignorant of the many manipulations of the English Bible that have come along in the past 200 years or so can, in any way, profit the child of God.
There's quite a bit behind why many are "KJVO", at least in the sense that they believe it to be the most accurate English translation, even today ( and especially today ).
As for dishonesty, I don't see how the ones that are treating the issue seriously are being dishonest;
They honestly see the differences between the several collated Greek texts that are being used, and by faith, trust that they already have God's words in their hands when they pick up the "Despised Authorized".
To me, it's a complicated issue that bears looking into by anyone who trusts God's every word and wants to be sure that they are actually getting it...
Despite the myriad of English translations currently being published and marketed in these last days.
I wish you well, sir.
Last edited:
I know.
My point about the KJV source is that the translators did not have complete Greek source.
When we read the KJV, the NIV, the ESV, the NASB....we are reading God's Word.
KJVO people do not understand translation and the Word of God. Instead they treat Scripture as a type of code. If man uses a different English word he changes the code and defeats God with the stroke of a pen.
37818
Well-Known Member
There is the issue of textual variants. Which either corrects the reading to the original or worse deviates from the original word of God. The reading between variants are the same. So the common readings should be without question the undisputed word of God in the translation.
Now the major disagreement is over the chosen variants.
There is. I was just noting an additional issue with the KJV. They did not have a complete text.
That said, the translators did a great job with what they had.
Even though they were to make a translation that supported the English monarchy, they produced what was essentially a revision of the English Bible. And they did a great job.